[lkml]   [2010]   [Dec]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v4] sched: automated per session task groups
    On Sat, Dec 4, 2010 at 3:55 PM, James Courtier-Dutton
    <> wrote:
    > On 3 December 2010 05:11, Paul Turner <> wrote:
    >> I actually don't have a desktop setup handy to test "interactivity" (sad but
    >> true -- working on grabbing one).  But it looks better on under synthetic
    >> load.
    > What tools are actually used to test "interactivity" ?
    > I posted a tool to the list some time ago, but I don't think anyone noticed.
    > My tool is very simple.
    > When you hold a key down, it should repeat. It should repeat at a
    > constant predictable interval.
    > So, my tool just waits for key presses and times when each one occurred.
    > The tester simply presses a key and holds it down.
    > If the time between each key press is constant, it indicates good
    > "interactivity". If the time between each key press varies a lot, it
    > indicates bad "interactivity".
    > You can reliably test if one kernel is better than the next using
    > actual measurable figures.
    > Kind Regards
    > James

    Could you drop me a pointer? I can certainly give it a try. It would
    be extra useful if it included any histogram functionality.

    I've been using a combination of various synthetic wakeup and load
    scripts and measuring the received bandwidth / wakeup latency.

    They have not succeeded in reproducing the starvation or poor latency
    observed by Mike above however. (Although I've pulled a box to try
    reproducing his exact conditions [ e.g. user environment ] on Monday).
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2010-12-05 06:15    [W:0.022 / U:62.328 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site